Circumcision

[Dave-W]

There is neither Jew nor Greek.

Be careful with using that verse in that sense.
That sense of usage on the next phrase (male nor female) could be grounds for support of gay marriage.

 

[Teslafied]

Be careful with using that verse in that sense.
That sense of usage on the next phrase (male nor female) could be grounds for support of gay marriage.

Did I say I supported gay marriage?

 

[Dave-W]

Did I say I supported gay marriage?

No, and let us keep it that way. BUT, if you take "neither Jew nor Greek" in the sense that neither title is valid any more, or you deny they have unique callings and requirements; you MUST make the same evaluation of "male nor female." The 2 phrases are near to each other in the same sentence. (with "slave nor free" in between) You cannot take one phrase one way and a following phrase entirely differently.

Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

So if there is a distinction in who a male can marry (a female ONLY) then this verse CANNOT be taken to mean the labels are invalid or obsolete. And if "male" and "female" are still valid, so too must be "Jew" and "Greek." There must remain SOME distinction on some level.

Now if you look at Acts 15, there is a short list of 4 things REQUIRED by gentile believers. (mostly Greeks in that decade) Circ is NOT included, and this list is NOT FOR JEWS who believe in Jesus. That is clearly stated in Acts 21.

 

[Meowzltov]

Why? Both are cutting off a bit of the babies genitals for non medical reasons without that persons consent.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Because one ruins a basic bodily function and the other does not.

 

[Meowzltov]

Can't a man also get raped by a woman, have a terrifying and painful ordeal, and still get the woman pregnant? I'm not sure what this has to do with it.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

My understanding is that male rape is still pleasurable. Of course that doesn't make it okay.

 

[Teslafied]

No, and let us keep it that way. BUT, if you take "neither Jew nor Greek" in the sense that neither title is valid any more, or you deny they have unique callings and requirements; you MUST make the same evaluation of "male nor female." The 2 phrases are near to each other in the same sentence. (with "slave nor free" in between) You cannot take one phrase one way and a following phrase entirely differently.

Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

So if there is a distinction in who a male can marry (a female ONLY) then this verse CANNOT be taken to mean the labels are invalid or obsolete. And if "male" and "female" are still valid, so too must be "Jew" and "Greek." There must remain SOME distinction on some level.

Now if you look at Acts 15, there is a short list of 4 things REQUIRED by gentile believers. (mostly Greeks in that decade) Circ is NOT included, and this list is NOT FOR JEWS who believe in Jesus. That is clearly stated in Acts 21.

I think you're misinterpreting that scripture... What that verse implies is not that both genders can be morphed etc but that God sees beyond our race and gender, that verse has nothing to do with homosexuality.

 

[Locutus]

Why are women arguing about whether men should be circumcised? I mean, I get that you may have a preference for what they look like. And of course you know what you do or don't want for your own children. But why get self righteous over the topic in general? Why accuse other parents of butchering their children's penii because they are keeping a precept of their faith?

As a circumcised man, I'm totally fine with it, glad to have been circumcised, and plan on getting my future sons circumcised. I really don't get what all the fuss is about.

Do or don't do what you want. But this practice isn't going away any time soon.

Because women are the ones who decide whether it's done. Back in the distant ye olden dayes .... when such barbaric vanities were still practised here, Doctors would asked women the question upon checking in to hospital to give birth. Women very much made the decision, despite male/father input of "I want my boy to be just like me".

Meantime, how are you be 'glad to be circumcised', if you're never been anything else? And why do you want your future sons circumcised? What is the advantage for them, if there is no cultural, religious, or health reason to do so?

 

[Locutus]

Correction, roughly 58% of newborns were circumcised in 2010 based on hospital discharge records (Source). And that's just non-medical circumcision performed in hospitals. It doesn't include medically necessary circumcision, or circumcision performed outside of a medical facility (as some Jews and Muslims do)

That's very disappointing. And quite a shock. It's been effectively illegal (at least, doctors have routinely refused to perform it for the past 20-30 years) here for a while so I guess I'd assumed there'd be some, but maybe more in the region of 5% :/

 

[Locutus]

circumcision doesn't ruin anything. everything remains in perfect working order.

how would you know?

besides, 'working order' is bare minimum. surely you'd want you boys to have access to more?

 

[Tallguy88]

Because women are the ones who decide whether it's done. Back in the distant ye olden dayes .... when such barbaric vanities were still practised here, Doctors would asked women the question upon checking in to hospital to give birth. Women very much made the decision, despite male/father input of "I want my boy to be just like me".

Where is "here" that it is no longer practiced? If you're not in the US, then the info I found was that it was still allowed in the UK, Canada, and Australia. It just isn't covered by the NHS, meaning parents would have to pay for it themselves.

Meantime, how are you be 'glad to be circumcised', if you're never been anything else? And why do you want your future sons circumcised? What is the advantage for them, if there is no cultural, religious, or health reason to do so?

Why wouldn't I be glad to be circumcised? Despite all the dramatics in this thread, I assure you everything still works just fine, and I'm not the least bit traumatized for having gone through it as a newborn.

There certainly are cultural and religious reasons do do so, and maybe health benefits too, according to the WHO.

 

[Tallguy88]

how would you know?

Can't that question be turned right back around to you?

besides, 'working order' is bare minimum. surely you'd want you boys to have access to more?

Everything works fine. Statistically, it doesn't appear to be a barrier to either pleasure or procreation. Anecdotally, I can confirm that it is not.

 

[Locutus]

I think that seeing an actual circumcision would dispel any silly ideas that its butchering.

the word butchering doesn't refer to the manner of cutting, but the act of cutting.

 

[Locutus]

Where is "here" that it is no longer practiced? If you're not in the US, then the info I found was that it was still allowed in the UK, Canada, and Australia. It just isn't covered by the NHS, meaning parents would have to pay for it themselves.

Why wouldn't I be glad to be circumcised? Despite all the dramatics in this thread, I assure you everything still works just fine, and I'm not the least bit traumatized for having gone through it as a newborn.

There certainly are cultural and religious reasons do do so, and maybe health benefits too, according to the WHO.

I'm somewhere that the process IS legal, but doctors refuse to do it. The only who will do it are Jewish, and Jewish doctors are not common here. And of course it must be paid for ... who would want to see their tax dollars funding vanity surgeries on newborns?

In the absence of Judaism, there are no religious reasons (in the west). There are no cultural reasons in the 21st Century west, and there are no health benefits. Hence doctors refusing to do it. I think they'd know, don't you?

 

[Locutus]

Can't that question be turned right back around to you?


Everything works fine. Statistically, it doesn't appear to be a barrier to either pleasure or procreation. Anecdotally, I can confirm that it is not.

But you're the recipient of a 'lesser' response, and have no means of comparing. If you had the choice, why would you choose 'less'? For yourself or a child?

 

[Locutus]

I think uncircumcised penises are ugly, they look like elephant trunks, and they reek of dead skin in nether region. It's not healthy.

Oh my. I feel bad for you

 

[Locutus]

they look like elephant trunks, .

You are aware that that's how your god designed them? And that that's how the majority of penises in the world actually look?

 

[Locutus]

I think we as believers have a right to circumcise.

So you have more rights than your infant sons? Interesting!

 

[Locutus]

Can't that question be turned right back around to you?

.

Not unless I grow a penis.

 

[Teslafied]

You are aware that that's how your god designed them? And that that's how the majority of penises in the world actually look?

I'm also aware of the fact that he prefers them circumcised. Afterall that's His commandment for His followers.

 

[Tallguy88]

I'm somewhere that the process IS legal, but doctors refuse to do it. The only who will do it are Jewish, and Jewish doctors are not common here. And of course it must be paid for ... who would want to see their tax dollars funding vanity surgeries on newborns?

In the absence of Judaism, there are no religious reasons (in the west). There are no cultural reasons in the 21st Century west, and there are no health benefits. Hence doctors refusing to do it. I think they'd know, don't you?

Judaism, Islam, and some Christian sects (Copic Orthodox, Ethiopian Orthodox, American Ecangelical) all perform circumcision for religious reasons.

And there definitely ARE health benefits to circumcision. Several peer reviewed studies show irrefutably that male circumcision lowers the likelihood of spreading the HIV by a significant percent, up to 95% according to one of the studies.